If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

RUSH: Yeah, it's fascinating to me to listen to Barney Frank lie and spin. Barney Frank is, I think, more than anybody else responsible for this situation -- and he twists it into the fault of the Republican minority in the House! The Republican minority, parliamentarily, cannot stop anything Barney Frank wants to do. Look at that layer of lies that we got. House Republicans coordinating with McCain against Bush, the Republicans have no role in this other than fixing the problem, and they're only responding 'cause Bush wants something done? This is the guy who said that he didn't know there was a male prostitution ring going on his own basement? Barney Frank needs to testify under oath for what he has done, and so does Chris Dodd!

So Pelosi will not bring a one-sided bill to the floor, says Barney Frank. So now they're deferential to the Republicans. The reason she won't bring this bill to the floor and ram it through is because the bill obviously stinks, and she needs cover. Meanwhile, Obama has not supported the plan. Has anybody noticed this? I have noticed it. Have you heard Obama support the plan? We've got a plan, right? We have a plan; everybody had signed on to it, they said yesterday morning. And then we find out there wasn't a plan, there wasn't an agreement, and I haven't heard Obama say he supports it. See, Obama votes "present." Obama doesn't make decisions. That's why he doesn't want to be there. He wants to be on the phone negotiating and listening.

So seems to me that we could easily say here that Obama and the Democrats don't agree, that Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank want the conservatives to back a bill that their own party leader has refused to back as of right now. They're doing everything to cover for the incompetence of this little man, Barack Obama. I realize you some of you just joining me may think that I have to prove it when I say that Barack Obama admitted he blew up the White House meeting. I'm going to give you two sound bites. First he had a press conference at the Mayflower Hotel. Not long, some hours after the White House meeting blew up, enough time for his thinkers to come up with an explanation. You now know what happened in there.

When Bush went to the Democrats and asked them to start speaking in negotiation, they all deferred to Obama. He didn't know what to say. He had been given notes by friends of Henry Paulson in an e-mail on the way to the meeting. The first thing on the notes was: criticize the Republican proposal. John Boehner was sitting there. He asked Paulson about it. This caused a brouhaha. The meeting fell apart. Obama walked out of there and the Democrats, Harry Reid and Pelosi... I guarantee you they walked out of there knowing full well what had happened, that their guy and his competence had been on full display, that that meeting broke down because of him and his inability to run it and lead it, as they tried to engineer. So they had to start damage control, and the first thing out of the box was this.

All this Washington shuffle, between both democrats and republicans, isn't some sort of partisan competition. No one is right or wrong here. Basically, both the dems and republicans had a hand in creating the situation, with a few distinct members of each party carrying no guilt. However, neither party has a clue when it comes to fixing the problems they created. All they can do is point the finger at each other and hope for the best, the best being the nation will divide the debate points along partisan lines, with only the opposing party blaming their opposite for what has happened. Basically, by attacking each other each party is hoping for a return to business as usual.

It's disgraceful, and in my opinion, siding with any party is equally disgraceful. The dems and repubs both had their hands in this situation, and neither one of them are fit to lead us out.

All this Washington shuffle, between both democrats and republicans, isn't some sort of partisan competition. No one is right or wrong here. Basically, both the dems and republicans had a hand in creating the situation, with a few distinct members of each party carrying no guilt. However, neither party has a clue when it comes to fixing the problems they created. All they can do is point the finger at each other and hope for the best, the best being the nation will divide the debate points along partisan lines, with only the opposing party blaming their opposite for what has happened. Basically, by attacking each other each party is hoping for a return to business as usual.

It's disgraceful, and in my opinion, siding with any party is equally disgraceful. The dems and repubs both had their hands in this situation, and neither one of them are fit to lead us out.

Bull. The Democrats are all over this. This is not a Republican scandal. If it were, they'd be naming names. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were instituted by, managed by and looted by Democrats. As I pointed out in another thread:

The whole thing was made inevitable by the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act, which was supposed to provide credit, including home ownership opportunities to underserved populations and commercial loans to small businesses, and enforced by FDIC, OCC, OTS, and FRB. Under the act, every lender is evaluated to determine if it has met the credit needs of its entire community, with the government using the evaluation to decide whether the lender should be premitted to apply for deposit facilities, including mergers and acquisitions. That's a nice sword of Damocles to hold over a bank. In 1995, the Clintons pushed the regulators' to look into institutions' performance in helping to meet community credit needs.
The Clinton Administration's regulatory revisions of January 31, 1995 substantially increased the number and aggregate amount of loans to small businesses and to low- and moderate-income borrowers for home loans. The revisions allowed lenders of subprime mortgages to issue securities. The Bush administration tried to institute changes to the oversight, but was opposed by Democrats, including Barack Obama. My favorite quote, and one that will haunt the Dems (or would if there were an MSM outlet that would publicize it) came from Barney Frank, who is now trying to set himself up as a subject matter expert on the banking crisis:

"These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

Naturally, this being a Democratic scandal, they are blaming the Republicans for not keeping them from screwing up. Oh, and no Democratic scandal would be complete without a certain amount of Clinton cronyism. Two Clintonistas ran Fannie Mae into the ground while lining their pockets: Franklin Delano Raines and Jamie Gorelick (who had no previous training nor experience in finance, but was still appointed Vice Chairman of FNMA from 1997 to 2003). Her compensation for those six years was over $26 million, despite a $10 billion accounting scandal.

Speaking to Business Week in the March 25, 2002 issue, Gorelick said, "We believe we are managed safely. We are very pleased that Moody's gave us an A-minus in the area of bank financial strength -- without a reference to the government in any way. Fannie Mae is among the handful of top-quality institutions."

And then there's Franklin Delano Raines.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), the regulating body of Fannie Mae, accused him of shifting losses (to the tune of $9 billion) so that he and his fellow executives could snag bonuses. They filed suit against him in 2006 in order to recover some or all of the $50 million in payments made to Raines based on the overstated earnings, with civil charges demanding $110 million in penalties and $115 million in returned bonuses from Raines and two other executives, J. Timothy Howard, Fannie's former chief financial officer, and Leanne G. Spencer, Fannie's former controller. The final settlement was for fines of $3 million (paid by Fannie's insurance policies) a donation of the proceeds from the sale of $1.8 million of his Fannie stock and to give up stock options (which have no value) and giving up $5.3 million of "other benefits" said to be related to his pension and forgone bonuses, which the Wall Street Journal called "paltry settlement." In 2003 alone, Raines's compensation was over $20 million. Fannie Mae also paid a record $400 million civil fine. Meanwhile, Raines received loans for over $3 million while CEO of Fannie Mae below market rate loans from Countrywide Financial.

And, the icing on the cake, care to guess what Raines is doing now? You got it! He's one of Barack Obama's chief economic advisers.

Think that this information just might make for an interesting debate? Hope that John McCain is briefed up on it.

All this Washington shuffle, between both democrats and republicans, isn't some sort of partisan competition. No one is right or wrong here. Basically, both the dems and republicans had a hand in creating the situation, with a few distinct members of each party carrying no guilt. However, neither party has a clue when it comes to fixing the problems they created. All they can do is point the finger at each other and hope for the best, the best being the nation will divide the debate points along partisan lines, with only the opposing party blaming their opposite for what has happened. Basically, by attacking each other each party is hoping for a return to business as usual.

It's disgraceful, and in my opinion, siding with any party is equally disgraceful. The dems and repubs both had their hands in this situation, and neither one of them are fit to lead us out.

Horse shit !

The Democrats own this one hook line and sinker !!

Sen.Dodd and Barney Fag have been protecting Fannie/Freddy for years and there is documented evidence if you would open your liberal obsessed baby blues and look !

The very fact that Pelosi is stalling and looking for a bunch of Republicans to join her is telling and that old Queen Barney Frank is drooling all over himself predicting a bill before the weekend is over !

The Republicans have a winner here and need to hold Dodd and Franks feet to the fire !
If the people have any brains (Beyond hope in Massachusetts)they will dump those two and the rest of the do nothing liberal Congress in the fall !

I think I've been misunderstood. The republicans did in fact have a hand in creating our present situation. They had six years with a republican led congress and a republican executive in which they could have unfucked freddie and fannie and they chose not to. Isn't it the job of the republicans to clean up the messes irresponsible democrats make? I thought that's what we paid them for. They knew it was a problem as soon as Clinton messed around with freddie and fannie, yet they didn't do a damn thing about it once the dims got ousted. Inactions can be just as damning as actions.

The focus of my gripe here however isn't about who created it. It's about why the dims won't push it through the bailout themselves. It's simple, they are scared. There is a very real possibility that the bailout will fail miserably, and they understand very little of the what the market's reaction to bail out could be. They don't want the bailout to flop and the republicans to point and laugh at them.

That's why it has to be bi-partisan, so when it flops one party can't make the other look stupid, and if it succeeds then everybody wins.

I think I've been misunderstood. The republicans did in fact have a hand in creating our present situation. They had six years with a republican led congress and a republican executive in which they could have unfucked freddie and fannie and they chose not to. Isn't it the job of the republicans to clean up the messes irresponsible democrats make? I thought that's what we paid them for. They knew it was a problem as soon as Clinton messed around with freddie and fannie, yet they didn't do a damn thing about it once the dims got ousted. Inactions can be just as damning as actions.

The focus of my gripe here however isn't about who created it. It's about why the dims won't push it through the bailout themselves. It's simple, they are scared. There is a very real possibility that the bailout will fail miserably, and they understand very little of the what the market's reaction to bail out could be. They don't want the bailout to flop and the republicans to point and laugh at them.

That's why it has to be bi-partisan, so when it flops one party can't make the other look stupid, and if it succeeds then everybody wins.

"I think I've been misunderstood. The republicans did in fact have a hand in creating our present situation. "

'The 'Hand' they had in the situation is one of power,committee power ! Even when the Republicans regained a majority Dodd was still The chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and Queen Franks "sits at the center of power". Chairman of the Financial Services Committee still ruled the house both by virtue of seniority !"

They had six years with a republican led congress and a republican executive in which they could have unfucked freddie and fannie and they chose not to.

The numerical voting advantage is just that.Some of the RINO'S have local issues in their districts and vote with the liberals on some 'gut' issues.

Congress has rules and for your information both president Bush and John Mc Cain tried without sauces to reign in Freddy and Fannie !

Isn't it the job of the republicans to clean up the messes irresponsible democrats make? I thought that's what we paid them for.
Again I am sure a smart guy knows the answers to these questions even as you state them so why play games ?

"Are you saying that the Liberals are incompetent and the conservatives have a duty to wipe their little asses when they make a mess of America ?"

They knew it was a problem as soon as Clinton messed around with freddie and fannie, yet they didn't do a damn thing about it once the dims got ousted. Inactions can be just as damning as actions.

"Clinton was your president and I'm sure you cheered his election and again we should clean up after your president
makes a total mockery of the presidency and disgraces America to the decent people of the world,'The great Fornicator in Chief' or don't you concider that sex !"

The focus of my gripe here however isn't about who created it. It's about why the dims won't push it through the bailout themselves. It's simple, they are scared.

There is a very real possibility that the bailout will fail miserably, and they understand very little of the what the market's reaction to bail out could be. They don't want the bailout to flop and the republicans to point and laugh at them.

Again do you think that I am a fool ?Your party loaded up the bill with more crap than a cellpool pumping truck hauls around.Slimey little Dirty Harry Reid slides in a provision to outlaw oil shale drilling and the rest hide money for voter fraud for ACORN and you want the bill passed no questions asked .

That's why it has to be bi-partisan, so when it flops one party can't make the other look stupid, and if it succeeds then everybody wins.

You are right about one thing your critters are scared and they should be.This whole thing stinks to high heavens and they own it for all of their sly dealings with America !